Judge Rules Appraiser/Lender Owe no duty of care

[Mike Ault]

Agree. It also appears that the op pressed on "full steam ahead" with executing the docs for purchase, without proper due diligence.

She made a mistake (as we all do) now, is the wiser for it and will most likely not do that again.

"Experience is simply the name we give our mistakes." - Oscar Wilde

Hopefully, nobody on this thread will ever just simply answer in the affirmative when questioned about the well and septic system distances meeting a particular client's "separation distance guidelines". That's a major issue, and unless you know that you can answer that question in a factual manner, "don't".

 

[Dublin ohio]

I'm no septic-pro so I don't know the answer to this: but if a leach field was already clogged would that be apparent to anyone at the time of a fill-n-drain? IF ALREADY CLOGGED and if the property had been left standing for several months would a fill-n-drain do anything to remediate it?

It has been established that it was an estate sale. So how long did the home sit empty. What was in the leach field lines when it was no longer being used. What dried up inside the lines. What was the occupancy prior to becoming an "estate". Probably 1 or 2 older individuals that put limited pressure on the system. I have observed more than one system failure. All of the were failures of the leach field. The guy that pumps septics in my area says tanks very seldom fail since they are just a tank. Failure of fitting at the tank are generally relatively easy to repair. Leach fields are another thing. Obviously an older system. OP mentioned that trees had to be removed to accomodate a new system. Could be tree roots that invaded the leach field

 

[George Hatch]

Once I commented in this thread for the 3rd or 4th time on "failure didn't occur until after being drained" the possibilities of a leach field problem finally dawned on me. I was slow on the uptake.

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

Who said no survey?

Post it then.

 

[Huds_Harm]

Absolutely, you are correct about that. However the appraiser is "responsible to the client" to properly communicate the appraisal, not the borrower. The appraiser is not even allowed to "discuss the appraisal with the borrower" without client permission. That should tell you something about your rights to rely upon it. I'm not saying that I'm in agreement with that concept, I'm just saying that's the way it is.

I did not rely on it. My loan did. And that part of the profession needs change.

 

[Huds_Harm]

Because you can’t possibly believe one of your own is incompetent and or fraudulent.

 

[George Hatch]

I keep telling you and you keep dismissing it, it's not the professional standards that need to change. It appears that in this case it's the applicable legal requirements WRT third party standing for situations like this. If the law read differently then you wouldn't be having this problem, and nobody here would be disputing the requirements and application of that law.

The requirements in our standards are strictly subordinate to the law; if the law requires something then that requirement also becomes applicable under our standards. We have no opt-out escape clause insofar as the law or what is/isn't legally permissible.

 

[George Hatch]

Because you can’t possibly believe one of your own is incompetent and or fraudulent.

Strawman. Just stop.

 

[Huds_Harm]

One more time Bayou,

You sidestepped my former post and did not answer....

What is it that you want from us?

Just to expose those of you who deflect to the borrower.

 

[Mike Ault]

Because you can’t possibly believe one of your own is incompetent and or fraudulent.

I don't believe that the appraiser "cropped photographic evidence to conceal defects". Part of my reasoning behind that is that you have the evidence in your hands to prove it, yet you refuse to post it. I'll accept that you have some legitimate reason, if you will accept my contention that your refusal to do so damages your credibility in the extreme.